Section 2 (b (b)) Definition of Evidence Benefits of Doubts The trial court held that the accused (appellant) was responsible for the death of the accused and participant in the trial of the accused. The accused were acquitted. Despite taking notice of the fact that the co-accused also fired on the accompanying accused, the accused was acquitted and after the accused was told without any reason and difference in their case. The conviction, which ignored the proof of the evidence and was an insult to the principle, could hardly have been accepted by two different conclusions on the same set of evidence. And such a situation raised suspicions that the accused had to rise to the trial court, failing to take notice of the fact that an eyewitness (brother of the brothers) late and the counsel of the memo for no valid reason. Or was not presented to the court for an excuse, leaving him to seek the court reasonably, he would not have supported the prosecution's case. The accused's conviction was not based on sound reasons, the accused's appeal was allowed, the trial court's decision was set aside and the accused acquitted.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
